Rio Olympic Logo: A Circular Dance of Plagiarism Charges
Posted by Abe Sauer on January 4, 2011 12:00 PM
The logo for Rio2016, aka the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, was recently unveiled after an exhaustive search. The selection committee considered 139 agencies before settling on Rio-based Tatil, whose entry was chosen as the official logo as it "exemplifies four Olympic pillars: contagious energy; passion and transformation; Olympic spirit; and exuberant nature."
But within days the committee and the agency were shocked to be slapped with plagiarism charges, with accusers pointing to the similar color schemes and logo design of Colorado's Telluride Foundation (above left). Tatil's director has acknowledged the similarities but dismissed the charge saying its entry "is radically different because it is tridimensional." We're inclined to agree.
While the color scheme and design are similar, it bears pointing out that the circle of hands design is a common motif, as shown by these examples:
Art lovers will recognize that the motif derives from Henri atisse's "La Danse" (below), an image inspired by Blake's "Oberon, Titania and Puck with Fairies."
Also, it's clear from the Tatil agency's video on the creation process of its Rio2016 logo — including the inspiration board at 1:28 and the montage at 3:56 showing how the logo's shape reflects Sugarloaf mountain, a Rio landmark — that an entirely different consideration set went into their logo:
The agency's website further outlines the logo's physical and cultural inspiration:
Together, different countries, athletes and peoples embrace in an individual and collective motion that reveals one of our city’s landmarks — a vibrant Sugarloaf, pulsating with joy, union, celebration and friendship. This landmark comes to life and gains a three-dimensional perspective, with volume and cut-outs. Contours create the topography of the city in our imagination. A brand-sculpture, infinite, that gains textures and shapes, transforming into an object; a playful brand that can be experienced.
Hence our (non-intellectual property legal-schooled) take: not plagiarism. Yours?
No comments:
Post a Comment